You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Molecular signatures and phylogenomic analysis of the genus Burkholderia: proposal for division of this genus into the emended genus Burkholderia containing pathogenic organisms and a new genus Paraburkholderia gen. nov. harboring environmental species
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Genetics, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fgene.2014.00429 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amandeep Sawana, Mobolaji Adeolu, Radhey S. Gupta |
| Abstract |
The genus Burkholderia contains large number of diverse species which include many clinically important organisms, phytopathogens, as well as environmental species. However, currently, there is a paucity of biochemical or molecular characteristics which can reliably distinguish different groups of Burkholderia species. We report here the results of detailed phylogenetic and comparative genomic analyses of 45 sequenced species of the genus Burkholderia. In phylogenetic trees based upon concatenated sequences for 21 conserved proteins as well as 16S rRNA gene sequence based trees, members of the genus Burkholderia grouped into two major clades. Within these main clades a number of smaller clades including those corresponding to the clinically important Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC) and the Burkholderia pseudomallei groups were also clearly distinguished. Our comparative analysis of protein sequences from Burkholderia spp. has identified 42 highly specific molecular markers in the form of conserved sequence indels (CSIs) that are uniquely found in a number of well-defined groups of Burkholderia spp. Six of these CSIs are specific for a group of Burkholderia spp. (referred to as Clade I in this work) which contains all clinically relevant members of the genus (viz. the BCC and the B. pseudomallei group) as well as the phytopathogenic Burkholderia spp. The second main clade (Clade II), which is composed of environmental Burkholderia species, is also distinguished by 2 identified CSIs that are specific for this group. Additionally, our work has also identified multiple CSIs that serve to clearly demarcate a number of smaller groups of Burkholderia spp. including 3 CSIs that are specific for the B. cepacia complex, 4 CSIs that are uniquely found in the B. pseudomallei group, 5 CSIs that are specific for the phytopathogenic Burkholderia spp. and 22 other CSI that distinguish two groups within Clade II. The described molecular markers provide highly specific means for the demarcation of different groups of Burkholderia spp. and they also offer novel and useful targets for the development of diagnostic assays for the clinically important members of the BCC or the pseudomallei groups. Based upon the results of phylogenetic analyses, the identified CSIs and the pathogenicity profile of Burkholderia species, we are proposing a division of the genus Burkholderia into two genera. In this new proposal, the emended genus Burkholderia will correspond to the Clade I and it will contain only the clinically relevant and phytopathogenic Burkholderia species. All other Burkholderia spp., which are primarily environmental, will be transferred to a new genus Paraburkholderia gen. nov. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 380 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 373 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 76 | 20% |
| Researcher | 56 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 49 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 49 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 41 | 11% |
| Unknown | 88 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 134 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 80 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 20 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 15 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 22 | 6% |
| Unknown | 105 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,734,051
of 23,402,852 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#708
of 12,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,267
of 356,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#11
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,402,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,435 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 356,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.